Congressional Support Research Articles

Materials for international version of Primary Neurosurgical Life Support (PNLS) for 11th Quadrennial Congress of The World Federation of Neuroscience Nurses

Materials for international version of Primary Neurosurgical Life Support (PNLS) for 11th Quadrennial Congress of The World Federation of Neuroscience Nurses

‘But Let Us Remember Him Then and Never Forget…’ - The Dilution of Satyagraha in South Africa

The author posits that Satyagraha (‘a force that comes from truth, love and non-violence’) as a concept and practice suffered three dilutions in South Africa. The first occurred in 1961 when Nelson Mandela launched Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK) without the African National Congress (ANC) or Albert Luthuli's knowledge or support. Mandela's insubordination placed the ANC, in his own words, “on a new and more dangerous path”. Satyagraha's second dilution began in 1967 when South African nationalist historiography began to mythologise the past by articulating that Luthuli, arguably the quintessential satyagrahi, approved of and supported the armed struggle. Satyagraha's third dilution began in 2003 when the Gandhi Development Trust began, through the Satyagraha Award, to link Satyagraha with those who launched MK and thus chose violent methods to liberate South Africa. The author argues that bestowing the Satyagraha Award upon those who themselves claim no spiritual, ethical or strategic allegiance to Satyagraha dilutes the Award's potency to advocate for non-violent methods. The author challenges morally confused associations adopted by defenders of a sanitised history and claims that merely striving for a non-violent and peaceful society does not therefore, by default, qualify one as a proponent or practitioner of Satyagraha. The author cautions against grafting Satyagraha to the ANC's struggle against Apartheid post-1961. Such an incongruous fusion often demonstrates an allegiance to a certain outcome (freedom) at any cost or to a political party rather than to Satyagraha's values. The moral confusion is painfully evident in today's violent South African society.

Why Do Members of Congress Support Agricultural Protection?

It seems paradoxical that developed countries continue subsidizing agriculture even though their agricultural sectors have been declining in relative importance since the middle of the 20th century. What drives support for agricultural protection in developed countries? We answer this question by testing three competing hypotheses about what drives support for agricultural protection in the US: (i) legislator preferences, (ii) electoral incentives, or (iii) lobbying. Using data on the roll call votes of the members of the 106th through the 110th Congresses (1999-2009) and the scores given to each legislator by the Farm Bureau, our findings suggest electoral incentives explain a great deal of the variation in support for agricultural protection, but that legislator preferences and lobbying play a role, too. Moreover, legislator preferences and electoral incentives appear to be substitutes for one another. Why does Congress support agricultural protection? Because many members have electoral incentives to — and because many of those who do not still have other personal or strategic interests at stake.

US presidents and the failure to ratify multilateral environmental agreements

Whereas the US President signed the Kyoto Protocol, the failure of the US Congress to ratify it seriously hampered subsequent international climate cooperation. This recent US trend, of signing environmental treaties but failing to ratify them, could thwart attempts to come to a future climate agreement. Two complementary explanations of this trend are proposed. First, the political system of the US has distinct institutional features that make it difficult for presidents to predict whether the Senate will give its advice and consent to multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) and whether Congress will pass the required enabling legislation. Second, elected for a fixed term, US presidents might benefit politically from supporting MEAs even when knowing that legislative support is not forthcoming. Four policy implications are explored, concerning the scope for unilateral presidential action, the potential for bipartisan congressional support, the effectiveness of a treaty without the US, and the prospects for a deep, new climate treaty. Policy relevance Why does the failure of US ratification of multilateral environmental treaties occur? This article analyses the domestic political mechanisms involved in cases of failed US ratification. US non-participation in global environmental institutions often has serious ramifications. For example, it sharply limited Kyoto's effectiveness and seriously hampered international climate negotiations for years. Although at COP 17 in Durban the parties agreed to negotiate a new agreement by 2015, a new global climate treaty may well trigger a situation resembling the one President Clinton faced in 1997 when he signed Kyoto but never obtained support for it in the Senate. US failure to ratify could thwart future climate agreements.

Overreach: leadership in the Obama presidency

Preface ix Introduction 1 Chapter 1: Assessing Opportunities: Public Support 9 Chapter 2: Creating Opportunities? Going Public 36 Chapter 3: Evaluating Strategic Choices: Leading the Public 80 Chapter 4: Assessing Opportunities: Congressional Support 116 Chapter 5: Creating Opportunities? Leading Congress 135 Chapter 6: Evaluating Strategic Choices: Passing Legislation 157 Chapter 7: Persuasion and Opportunity in Presidential Leadership 179 Notes 189 Index 225

Rhetoric and Reality? Unilateralism and the Obama Administration

ObjectivesThe objectives of this article are to examine the concept of presidential unilateralism in the Obama administration. The research to date suggests that unilateralism in a presidency occurs once the political conditions for a president become unstable—drop in public opinion, loss of congressional support, etc. This article argues that the Obama administration came to office with the assumption that those conditions would naturally occur, thus began to prepare to act unilaterally from the outset.MethodsThis article uses official White House memoranda coupled with an examination of presidential signing statements to support the argument.ResultsPresident Obama made it difficult to track the use of the signing statement by discontinuing use of the Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents in the first days of the administration as well as a redesign of the White House website to make it hard to determine which signing statements made constitutional challenges to provisions of law and which did not, all without drawing much attention from the public, the press, or the Congress.ConclusionsObama has governed very much like his predecessors, where acting unilaterally is concerned. He has continued to use the signing statement much like his predecessors with an eye toward keeping his actions hidden from public view.

Protest and Congressional Behavior: Assessing Racial and Ethnic Minority Protests in the District

Although minority protest is often characterized as an effective form of political participation, previous research has been unsuccessful in establishing a direct link between protest activity and congressional support for minority interests. However, the shortcoming of the existing literature is related to an analytical focus at the aggregate level, where only the passage of congressional legislation and national-level protest events are considered. By linking district-level minority protest actions to individual roll-call votes on race, I hypothesize that minority activism can indicate constituency preferences and inform legislators’ votes. This analytical approach provides a more nuanced understanding of the influence that citizens’ behavior has on congressional policy. Using protest data and congressional roll-call votes from the 87th to the 101st Congress, the empirical analysis demonstrates that representatives are attuned to the social conditions of their district and use minority protest as an informative cue that shapes their congressional voting behavior.

The JOBS Act of 2012: The Struggle between Capital Formation and Investor Protections

The President signed the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act on April 5, 2012, to overwhelmingly bipartisan, congressional support. The legislation was enacted to “increase American job creation and economic growth by improving access to the public capital markets for emerging growth companies.” The Act was an amalgamation of six related bills introduced in the House of Representatives. The law reduces regulatory burden on smaller companies, eliminates the strict prohibition of general solicitation and advertising in private offerings, allows companies to utilize crowdfunding up to $1 million per year, extends the small issues exemption to offerings up to $50 million, and increases the maximum number of shareholders to 2,000 for private companies and banks exempt from registration. This Article details at the provisions of the JOBS Act and analyzes their impact on capital formation and investor protection. Part I discusses the Reopening American Capital Markets to Emerging Growth Companies Act, examining the emerging growth company status and the impact on issuers and investors. Part II discusses Access to Capital for Job Creators Act, which lifts the ban on general solicitation for offering made up solely of accredited investors or qualified institutional buyers. Part III discusses the Capital Raising Online While Deterring Fraud and Unethical Non-Disclosure Act, which legalizes equity crowdfunding. Part III will examine the crowdfunding provision and the requirements for issuers, intermediaries, and investors. Part IV discusses the Small Company Capital Formation Act, which increases the cap on Regulation A offerings from $5 million to $50 million. In conclusion, Part V discusses both Private Company Flexibility and Growth Act and Capital Expansion Act, which increase the shareholder limit for private companies and banks.

The African National Congress in the Western Transvaal/Northern Cape Platteland, c. 1910–1964: Patterns of Diffusion and Support for Congress in a Rural Setting

This article examines the nature and trajectory of ANC engagement with the predominantly rural inhabitants of the former western Transvaal/northern Cape, the region of the present-day North-West province. Even before the formal launching of the ANC, a number of influential figures in the region, in particular members of the Molema family in Mafikeng, provided an intellectual framework for the founding of an African nationalist movement. From its inception then the organisation gained significant support in the rural districts, both because the Molema's were an important chiefly family, and because the Batswana rural elites saw in the ANC an instrument for countering the impact of the 1913 Native Land Act. In the 1920s the ANC was able to sustain its initial success by the formation of ANC branches in most of the small dorps (towns) in the western Transvaal platteland. By the end of the decade however, the ANC's influence waned, and the South African Communist Party and the Industrial and Commercial Workers' Union of Africa (ICU), were able to mobilise African political opinion and activity more effectively. The situation began to change in the 1950s as the state began increasingly to direct its attention to controlling the lives of rural Africans and taking control of traditional authorities. The 1957 ‘Hurutshe Revolt’ was the catalyst for a wider regional resistance to the carrying of passes for women specifically, and state intervention in general. The article traces the genesis of this resistance, and through the recent availability of source materials, the role of the ANC in the affair. Support for the ANC quickened after this, and the Zeerust became to key to ANC strategy as the period of exile began.

1911 Weeks Act: the Legislation that Nationalised the US Forest Service

A century ago, the US Congress passed legislation that authorised the Secretary of Agriculture ‘to purchase forested, cutover, or denuded lands within the watersheds of navigable streams’. Known as the 1911 Weeks Act, the bill had an enormous impact on the newly created national forest system. The purchase authority eventually added nearly 20 million acres to the national forest system east of the Mississippi River, but its influence goes far beyond the boundaries of the national forests. In addition, the Weeks Act provided funding and authority for the US Forest Service to enter into cooperative agreements with state and private forest owners, thus extending federal forest conservation practices across the nation. This article traces the events and context surrounding forest management in the US that led to passage of the Act. After decades of efforts, a coalition of public interest and congressional support combined to pass one of the foundational pieces of legislation in American forest management whose influence continues today.

Politics or Policy? How Rhetoric Matters to Presidential Leadership of Congress

In this article, we examine the linkage between presidential policy proposal messages and legislative success. Employing a data set on presidential legislative proposals that covers the years 1949‐2010, we find that politics matters less than policy. Purely political messages that reference the electoral logic of mandates or appeal to a sense of bipartisanship appear to have no impact on presidential legislative success, nor does policy signaling, though highlighting the role of agency‐based policy experts in crafting legislation does. From these results, we conclude that although the way presidents communicate their messages to Congress represents an important component of presidential‐legislative relations, it is instead the perceived quality of the legislation that more strongly shapes congressional support of presidential policy efforts.

The utilization of genetic approaches for effective conservation of endangered species ConGRESS project, regional workshop, Zvolen, January 25– 27, 2012

The ConGRESS (Conservation Genetic Resources for Effective Species Survival, within 7th EU Framework Program) is an EU consortium dedicated to transferring current knowledge in conservation genetics and in the analysis of genetic variation data to management professionals and policy makers (http://www.congressgenetics.eu). The project ConGRESS is aimed at the activities at the regional level, with particular emphasis on improving skills and knowledge regarding biological diversity and methods of protection in the regions of Europe, where it can be particularly lacking today. By building a network based on the scientists, specialists, practitioners involved in the protection of plant and animal species management and protection policies will be possible to provide a forum for communicating ideas, experiences and support that will strengthen the protection of European biodiversity and the future will improve coverage of its activities (http://review.j4b.com/ Congress/default.aspx). The meeting initiated by the ConGRESS project was contributed to educate a new generation of conservation managers and politicians who could be able to take into account and apply genetic research in biodiversity conservation projects in the future. The meeting was attended by about 70 scientists from four European Union member states: Czech Republic, Slovakia, Italy, Poland and Croatia. The initiator of the organisation of scientific workshop were Ladislav Paule, Professor (Slovakia) and Josef Bryja, Associate Professor (Czech Republic). The main topics were related to the following issues: Presentation of the project’s ConGRESS and decision support tools for species conservation: – Description and utilization of modeling package available on the website of the project – Testing of different scenarios of decision in modeling tools of project work package – Testing of different scenarios in simulation tools of project work The summary discussion of the symposium with the main topics: – What are the main limitations of research results on conservation of genetic resources? – What should be done to improve the co-operation between scientists and geneticists to make it more efficient in practice? – Where could be find funding to build on their achievements in genetic decision-making processes regarding environmental protection? The Regional Workshop – “Utilization of genetic approaches for effective conservation of endangered species,” provides a platform linking the studies molecular biologists working in the assessment of genetic variability of endangered populations of plants and animals on one side and biologists practitioners actively involved in the protection of species. Long-term stability of gene pool in forest ecosystem is crucial to protect their ability to adapt to the impact of environmental changes, so conservation of adaptive genetic abilities of forest trees is fundamental in genetic management of forest stands. One of the fundamental facThe utilization of genetic approaches for effective conservation of endangered species ConGRESS project, regional workshop, Zvolen, January 25– 27, 2012

The Domestic Politics of Humanitarian Intervention: Public Opinion, Partisanship, and Ideology

The debate around humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect generally concerns a collective action problem on the international level: motivating states to participate in a multilateral coalition to stop a mass atrocity. This debate presupposes that states enjoy a domestic consensus about their rights and responsibilities to intervene. This article reconsiders this assumption and examines the sources of domestic political will for intervention, particularly the role of partisanship, ideology, and public opinion on Congressional members' willingness to support US intervention for humanitarian purposes. We analyze several Congressional votes relevant to four episodes of US humanitarian intervention: Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo. We find that public support for humanitarian intervention increases Congressional support and that other political demands, primarily partisanship and ideological distance from the president, often trump the normative exigencies of intervention. Our findings shed light on the domestic political dynamics behind humanitarian intervention and can help explain why some recent humanitarian missions have proceeded without seeking Congressional approval.

Comparative effectiveness in neurosurgery: what it means, how it is measured, and why it matters

Comparative effectiveness research has recently been the subject of intense discussion. With congressional support, there has been increasing funding and publication of studies using comparative effectiveness and related methodology. The neurosurgical field has been relatively slow to accept and embrace this approach. The author outlines the procedures and rationale of comparative effectiveness, illustrates how it applies to neurosurgical topics, and explains its importance.

Modest but uneven R&D increases proposed for FY 2013

Uncertainty created by the Budget Control Act of 2011 clouds the outlook for federal science and technologyfunding. Some Department of Energyphysics programs face significant cuts.

Moby-Dick and the American Empire

This article explores the parallels between the narrative tropes of Moby-Dick and the conduct of the Mexican War of 1846–48. Drawing on the theories of Austin and Butler, the article develops an account of the performative speech acts deployed by President James K. Polk in order to secure Congressional support for the war, and the rhetorical power exercised by Ahab on the Pequod. It also examines in detail Melville’s use of the Biblical figures of King Ahab and Belshazzar, showing how the novel turns the Biblical-republican typology used in the American Revolution against the British to indict America’s own practice of imperialism. The article concludes by reflecting on both the vision of perpetual war which Melville presents as the consequence of Polk’s assumption of imperial power, and the parallels between Polk’s prosecution of the war with Mexico and the US invasion of Iraq.

New clean air efforts face tough challenges, say senators and former EPA administrators

With the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) coming under repeated attack from some members of Congress and others for perceived heavy‐handed regulatory actions, two moderate U.S. senators and two former EPA administrators recently noted the need for continued measures to improve air quality. However, they also acknowledged the difficulty in moving forward with new legislative efforts to revise the federal Clean Air Act to further reduce air pollution in the current polarized political climate. “Nobody who wants to see constructive changes [to the act] would dare touch it or propose it in the current climate,” said former EPA administrator William Reilly at a 23 January forum sponsored by the World Resources Institute. Reilly, who served as EPA administrator from 1989 to 1992, noted that bipartisan congressional support had been key to addressing many environmental problems up until the mid‐1990s.

Guns, Butter, and Human Rights—The Congressional Politics of U.S. Aid to Egypt

In February 2011, the dramatic ouster of Hosni Mubarak threw into the spotlight the U.S. policy of granting generous and unconditional aid to the Egyptian regime at a time when the strategic rationale for such aid had become less obvious and calls for inserting human rights considerations into foreign aid allocations more prominent. Focusing on an unprecedented set of roll call votes taken in the U.S. House of Representatives during the years 2004 to 2007, this article offers the first quantitative assessment of the determinants of Congressional support for U.S. economic and military aid for Egypt. It challenges conventional wisdom on the limited role of campaign contributions in Congressional decision making by highlighting the central role of defense lobby contributions in maintaining the Congressional coalition that shielded Egypt’s prerevolutionary regime from increased U.S. pressure in the years leading up to its eventual demise.

The Impact of Health Care and Immigration Reform on Latino Support for President Obama and Congress

At the start of their term, the Obama administration pledged to reform two failing policy systems in the United States: immigration and health care. The Latino populations’ attitudes toward these two critical policy areas are particularly relevant due to the large foreign born population in the Latino community and the large number of Latinos who lack health insurance. Yet studies have not examined what factors shape Latino approval ratings and whether support for health and immigration reform affect Latino approval ratings of the current administration. We use the 2009 Latino Decisions survey and find that the foundations of Latino approval ratings are political in nature, with support for health and immigration policy reform driving support of the current administration. Given the vital role the Latino electorate played during the 2008 election, the success of these two policy reform efforts may have major implications for the 2012 elections.

Foreign Policy Votes and Presidential Support in Congress

This paper explores the role of foreign policy votes on presidential support in Congress. We postulate that a selection effect is inherent in this topic. Failing to consider that certain factors will influence whether a president takes a position on an issue in the first place can yield misleading results. For instance, presidents might not take positions during lame duck years or when their popularity is low. They might be more willing to take positions on international votes, votes requiring super majorities, or those that take place during a honeymoon period. In turn, this decision regarding position-taking can bias the outcome. We also capture the relationship between Congress and public opinion in our models as it is important to consider that the Congress is listening to its constituents as well. If the public identifies international problems as the most important to the nation, Congress might be more willing to vote in favor of the president on international votes. Testing key vote data from 1953 to 2003 for each chamber, we show that presidents are more likely to take positions if the vote is international, if the public identifies the “most important problems” as international ones, and if the vote requires a super majority for passage. They are less likely to take positions if they are up for reelection and are lame ducks. In turn, international votes, the percentage of the public identifying international problems as the most important, and the size of the president's majority have positive effects on presidential support. These findings are obscured if selection is not taken into account.